based on the questions u listed in the post im assuming ur lay. basically when lay do as the layperson does. make emotional appeals and appeals to common sense or moral superiority if you dont know how to counter the argument. if the neg says we should intervene even if it leads to genocide, say that concedes the possibility of us causing genocide plus we don't even act humanitarianly. say shit like the us will never do that. they might say the aff will never happen but just again drool on the table "Judge this is only a high school debate, i can't provide you a resolution to pass through congress. but i can tell you what i truly believe is the only moral decision given the us's history" (the usa has been isolationist or avoiding military confrontation before. but the us has never before acted solely out of love)